~ "The world was made so that Christ might be born…." ~David Fergusson

Shirk and the “Uncreated Qu’ran”

Did you know that Muslims believe in an Uncreated ‘Word of God’ — no, not like us Christians who believe in the eternal logos (or Jesus) — they believe that the Qu’ran is eternal, an ingenerate or uncreated reality. But if I was a thinking Muslim (which would be really hard since I’m a Christian 😉 ) this would cause me, at the least, some cognitive dissonance. What I mean is this, the Muslim holds to a doctrine known as Shirk, which is:

Shirk (Arabic: شرك‎) is the Islamic concept of the sin of polytheism specifically, but in a more general way refers to worshipping other than Allah, associating partners with him, giving his characteristics to others beside him, or not believing in his characteristics. Within Islam, Major Shirk is a forgivable sin if one repents from it while one is alive, but according to Islamic texts, anyone who dies upon this sin will never enter paradise. It is the vice that is opposed to the virtue of tawhid, literally “declaring [that which is] one”, often translated into the English term monotheism. (source: wikipedia) [1]

Straightaway you’ll notice why it is that Christians are condemned, since we are Trinitarian, and therefore “associate partners” with God. But similarly, the doctrine of Shirk, like a double-edged sword, cuts both ways. You see, given the “uncreated nature of the Qu’ran,” Muslims attribute characteristics to the Qu’ran that Allah alone embodies; in other words, Allah alone is uncreated, yet according to Islam, so is the Qu’ran. Do you see the dilemma? Muslims, if they are going to be consistent with their own standards, engage in Shirk by holding to their view of the eternality of the Qu’ran. Interesting.

Like this:

Related

Post navigation

10 thoughts on “Shirk and the “Uncreated Qu’ran””

Very interesting, so all the talk of Allah and Jehovah being the same person is really just a snow job by the media and muslim/liberal moderates.

The Old Testament does make it clear however that our God is not three separate persons, rather the Lord our God is one God. Thus the mystery of the trinity is foolishness to those whose eyes are blinded.

Yes, I agree the OT does not present a view of God that is tritheistic; but it also doesn’t hide the fact that there are three (i.e. the Father, the Angel of Yahweh, and the Holy Spirit are all present throughout the pages of the OT).

Perhaps trying to understand with out finite minds the mystery of the Triune God is what has led some to adopt oneness theism. This tension between God being one and yet three is truly a mystery. I cannot understand it but clearly see it in the scriptures.

There is no doubt that there are some mysterious elements to the Trinity. But it’s not as mysterious as some “Evangelicals” assume it to be!

In other words, I fear sometimes when people say “mystery” this is code for “we can’t know much about it at all, or why even try.”

There’s an excellent book on the Trinity by Thomas F. Torrance called: The Christian Doctrine of God, One Being Three Persons, that you should read!!! You can get it for about $30, it is well worth the money.

Ha ha, thanks for the vote of confidence. The bible does speak of certain things as mysterious, one being Christ and His Church. The eternal nature of God is another matter that I cannot fathom or comprehend but by faith I believe He is the self existing and uncreated One.

I agree. But often mystery in the Bible is in reference to something that has become known in Christ . . . such as Christ and His church. I’m not saying that God isn’t ineffable, just that I think there is a tendency for us to give up to soon.

It looks like “Tektonics” is repeating some interesting points. I just skimmed a bit of it, I actually have a problem with this: “Jesus, as God’s Word and Wisdom, was and is eternally an attribute of God the Father”. This actually assumes a view of God that I don’t follow. In fact to be more pointed it assumes a rather Aristotelian or even Stoic notion of God (as “Monad”) wherein we have “God” hovering behind the back of the persons so that the Son can be said to be an “eternal attribute” of God the Father (i.e. that Jesus and the Holy Spirit “subsist” out of this “substance” known as God, or in this case, the Father . . . which is subordinationism).

I think a better place to start, Danny, is maybe to read J. N. D. Kelly’s “Early Christian Doctrines;” and then definitely to read T. F. Torrance’s “Christian Doctrine of God.”

I’ll have to read this article you link to more thoroughly, but these are my first impressions.

Welcome

My name is Bobby Grow, I run this blog, and "My Book Blog". Feel free to peruse the posts, and I look forward to the interchange.

Follow Blog via Email

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 10 other followers

A Little Thomas Torrance

"God loves you so utterly and completely that he has given himself for you in Jesus Christ his beloved Son, and has thereby pledged his very being as God for your salvation. In Jesus Christ God has actualised his unconditional love for you in your human nature in such a once for all way, that he cannot go back upon it without undoing the Incarnation and the Cross and thereby denying himself. Jesus Christ died for you precisely because you are sinful and utterly unworthy of him, and has thereby already made you his own before and apart from your ever believing in him. He has bound you to himself by his love in a way that he will never let you go, for even if you refuse him and damn yourself in hell his love will never cease. Therefore, repent and believe in Jesus Christ as your Lord and Saviour." ~T. F. Torrance, "The Mediation of Christ", 94